geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bohn <>
Subject Re: Time for Geronimo 2.1.4 release?
Date Tue, 03 Feb 2009 22:12:27 GMT
Thanks for the info Jay and for doing some more digging.

I don't really have a strong desire to push everything to xBean 3.5.  I 
was just trying to eliminate the use of multiple xBean versions as this 
could potentially cause problems (and confusion) for our users.

It looks like we originally moved up to xBean 3.5 (actually 
3.5-SNAPSHOT) to resolve a jca context issue (Geronimo-4375).  However, 
it looks like it was soon discovered that there were issues with the 
OpenEJB, ASM and xBean versions in G.  As a result ... we ended up 
reverting back to an older ASM and xBean 3.3 for finder and reflect 
while keeping the newer xbean-naming 3.5 so that the original issue was 
still resolved.  That seems to be working and is perhaps the best 
approach.  I was just concerned about using the various xBean versions 
in our Geronimo 2.1.4 server.  Perhaps using the various xBean versions 
is still the best thing to do here.  I didn't realize that there were 
core issues in OpenEJB attempting to use anything greater than 3.4.1.


Jay D. McHugh wrote:
> Hey everyone,
> If we want to get OpenEJB 3.0.1 to move up to XBeans 3.5, then I think
> that we'll need to chip in to resolve the problems that pop up when you
> use a version greater than 3.4.1.
> That was the highest version (available at the time) that could be used
> in the OpenEJB 3.0 branch without causing errors.
> I'll try switching to XBeans 3.5 (after the build I am in the middle of
> finishes) and let you all know if it goes through cleanly.
> My feeling is that it won't though.
> Also, I have been trying to get a 'final' Geronimo 2.0.x release put
> together and will need OpenEJB 3.0.1 for that (3.0 no longer builds
> because the artifacts for XBeans changed groupIds).
> Jay
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>> I was relaying the information second-hand ... so it's very possible I
>> got it wrong.
>> It looks like there is a dependency xBean in OpenEJB ... but it's 3.4.1
>> rather than 3.3 (as we have in the branches/2.1).  So, perhaps if we can
>> convince OpenEJB 3.0.x to xBean 3.5 we can then make the references
>> consistent in our 2.1 branch.
>> Thanks,
>> Joe
>> Donald Woods wrote:
>>> I don't see any dependencies on Xbean in OpenJPA 1.0.x or 1.2.x. 
>>> Maybe you're thinking about OpenEJB?
>>> -Donald
>>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>> I agree we should get a 2.1.4 release out ... and you certainly have
>>>> my vote for release manager!
>>>> The only thing I would add to the list is to get our xBean references
>>>> to a consistent versions.  I noticed this as I was updating
>>>> branches/2.1 and trunk to pull in the newly released xBean 3.5.  In
>>>> branches/2.1 we have a mix of 3.3 dependencies (finder and reflect)
>>>> and 3.5 dependencies (naming).  I've been told that this was due to
>>>> OpenJPA dependencies on 3.3.  Now that we are pulling in a new
>>>> OpenJPA release we will hopefully be able to update everything to use
>>>> xBean 3.5.
>>>> Joe
>>>> Jarek Gawor wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I think it's time for Geronimo 2.1.4 release. We've had a lot of
>>>>> important fixes since 2.1.3 and we should get them out to our users.
>>>>> And if we agree, I would also like to volunteer to be a release
>>>>> manager for this release.
>>>>> Looking at the current status for 2.1.4 there are still a few things
>>>>> that we need to do before we can go ahead with the release. I updated
>>>>> the
>>>>> page with some of these items. If there are any open bugs that _need_
>>>>> to be fixed for 2.1.4 or if I missed anything in that list please just
>>>>> update that wiki page.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jarek

View raw message